Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Childhood, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Government, Lego, My Childhood, Play, Toys
I love Lego.
I played with it.
I’ve bought it for others.
I once applied for a job there.
I’ve had the privilege of presenting to people there.
Lego is a brand with infinite possibilities and made with real consideration.
But recently I saw this note they used to put inside their boxes and it reminded me how over the years, Lego has seemingly moved more towards instruction than imagination:
Now I appreciate Lego has never been so successful. Or adored.
Nor do I think they’ve changed their belief that play is an important way to learn.
But while kids may well use their product as they see fit, there was something brilliant about a brand openly celebrating you had the power to use it as you choose. That the power of your imagination was more important and valuable than any specific direction or instruction that they put forward.
OK, so even in the past there were Lego ‘kits’ … but they seemed to be more about inspiration to get you started rather than a goal to know when you’ve finished.
Maybe that is one of the reasons for Roblox’s rise.
That’s almost all imagination … or said another way … less direction.
Who knows, what I am sure of is the World needs Lego and I just hope that somewhere along the line, that note to parents makes a comeback, because in a world that is increasingly structured and defined by the actions of the privileged and powerful … imagination is the only thing that can take us all to somewhere new and better.
Might be worth companies taking note for how to get the best out of their creative partners too.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Business, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Customer Service, Effectiveness, Food, Loyalty, Management, Marketing, Membership, Relationships, Relevance, Resonance, Respect, Strategy, Trust
So Kevin Chesters recently posted some work from the far distant past.
It was work that I adored at the time and even now, I feel is one of the best pieces of communication ever made.
EVER. MADE.
But it’s not NIKE. Or Apple. Or anything approaching ‘cultural cool’ … it’s for a supermarket.
Oh, but wait … there’s more.
Because it’s not a brand ad – though it does a ton for the brand – it’s a retail ad.
But instead of starbursts and shelf wobblers … it’s a masterclass in craft and smarts. Where the majestic charm and wry humour not only treats the audience with intelligence, but communicates price in a way you see value both in the product and the company selling it.
Regardless of the item.
Regardless of the audience ‘segment’.
Regardless of whether it’s selling food or their loyalty scheme.
It’s incredible and what’s more … it’s from the early 2000’s.
I think.
But despite being almost 20 years old, it’s still one of the best examples of a brand that knows who they are, knows who their audience is and knows the relationship they would like to have with their audience.
More than that, they know the problem they’re solving.
Not just in a general sense … but in terms of the potential barrier for each item.
In a world of wish-standard Nike knockoffs, this is an example of advertising not just communicating, but undeniably contributing to the growth, value and reputation of the company it represents.
When it wants to be – and when it’s allowed to be – this industry can be outstanding.
While we can’t control the standards other parties may demand, we can control what ours are.
Of course, in these ‘procurement-led times’ you could say ‘you get what you pay for’.
And I get that.
But watching the value and standards of what we do fall down a drain doesn’t seem a particularly good business approach.
Which is why I find myself repeating what an old boss of mine used to say to me.
“What happens next is up to us”.
He’s never been more right.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Apple, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Comment, Confidence, Consultants, Creative Development, Creativity, Design, Distinction, Emotion, Empathy, Focus Groups, Management, Perspective, Professionalism, Standards
McKinsey.
Oh McKinsey.
I’ve written a bunch about them in the past.
Hell, they were the reason one of my tweets went viral.
Scared the shit out of me.
I mean going viral, not the tweet.
And while I appreciate McKinsey have some very smart people working there and there are stories of their bullish confidence that are mildly amusing … let’s not forget they would recommend killing their grandmother if it made them an extra dollar.
Note I said ‘recommend’ … because like a Mafia boss, McKinsey never get their hands dirty, they make others do that. Then they can blame them when it goes wrong … similar to financial institutions who pay out millions to make problems go away rather than face the music in a court of law.
Which is why I found this interview they ran with Jony Ive so interesting.
OK, so Jony Ive is an interesting person so it was never going to run the risk of being bad … but what was fascinating was the headline they ran with it.
Creativity.
Unpredictability.
A great idea cannot be predicted.
Jesus Christ, that must have been like Kryptonite to the ‘everything is a process’ Kings.
I also love how they call it ‘provocations to ponder’.
Why is it a provocation?
Why is it something to ponder?
That’s literally the creative process … except, I suppose, for companies like McKinsey, who would regard that perspective as a celebration of the subjective and the inconsistent, which means it’s seen more as an act of wilful danger than the liberation of possibility.
But because it’s Jony Ive … McKinsey have turned a blind eye. After all, Jony is a global design icon. The driving force behind so many Apple products. Steve Jobs trusted sidekick. Being seen to walk in his circles can only be a good thing, despite the fact he represents the total opposite of what McKinsey do and value.
Oh hang on … someone’s going to say, “creativity is in everything”.
And they’re right of course and – despite what I said a few paragraphs ago – it’s fair to say McKinsey do embrace some elements of creativity.
However the creativity Ive is talking about is not the creativity McKinsey value.
Or practice.
For them, it’s approached functionally and economically, whereas for Ive, it’s about enabling change. An ability to see, think or feel differently. And while they may share similarities, it’s in the same way mathematicians and musician are similar.
Both do things based on numbers … except one uses it to shine a light on problems or solutions, whereas the other is the byproduct of the light.
Both have their value.
Both are about moving forward.
But how they do it are totally different.
Chalk and fucking cheese.
Which is why if I’m going to end this post with anything, it’s this:
Don’t let anyone try to tell you the light doesn’t matter.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, China, Chinese Culture, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Effectiveness, Film, Nike, Sport, Wieden+Kennedy
So the posts this week have been quite emotional.
Well, they have for me …
And – if you watched the hostage negotiation film in yesterday’s post – probably for you too.
And given I’ll be writing an emotional post on Friday – in preparation for what would have been my wonderful Dad’s 85th birthday on Sunday – I thought I’d take a bit of a lighter approach to today, because frankly, I’ve cried enough for this week.
This post is about case study films.
Specifically case study films by agencies for award submissions.
To be fair, there are some that are truly great. Mainly the ones that actually have the work to back it up rather than those that crank up the cliches and superlatives because they haven’t.
Even though I’ve made more films than Spielberg, this is one of my faves … even though it blows my mind it’s 11 years old now.
But even that … even with all it’s success is no match for what I’m about to show you.
A film that trumps 95% of all Cannes/WARC/Effies case study films.
Not just because it is clear, entertaining and informative.
But because it demonstrates more human insight than all those others put together.
Enjoy.
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Apathy, Attitude & Aptitude, Australia, Brand, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Creative Brief, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Distinction, Effectiveness, Embarrassing Moments, Emotion, Empathy, Fake Attitude, Government, Insight, Internet, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Mediocrity, Nike, Planners, Point Of View
OK, I’m back.
Again.
And this time, I’m not going to be going away for …. hmmmmm, actually let’s not go there.
Let’s move on shall we?
So before I start, there’s 2 things to say.
1. Some may have seen this before, because I accidentally put the wrong publish date on it.
2. This is a week of long and – for me – serious posts. So don’t say I didn’t warn you.
The good news is that on Friday, you’ll be rewarded for it, with some news that benefits you as much as it does me.
Kinda.
Maybe.
OK, so one thing that drives me nuts is when brands talk in totally different voices to different audiences.
But there’s something that gets to me more, and that’s when the brand in question has tried to position themselves as some sort of ‘brand of the people’.
Case in point, Reddit …
I really like Reddit.
I think their ‘front-page of the internet’ is a brilliant place to play.
And then I saw this …
‘Where Engagement Meets Results’.
What the fuck is that about?
Oh I know what some will say …
“They’re trying to reach business people who discount Reddit as a commercially valuable platform”.
And maybe they are. But the irony is the easiest way to discount Reddit as a commercially valuable platform is having clients on there who only can communicate in the corporate monotone of the meaningless mission statement.
How insincere is a brand who speaks to their customers one way and business another?
How crazy is it that some think business people are a different species to ‘normal’ people?
How badly will Reddit’s audience react to work from companies who only speak business?
Now some may think I’m going over-the-top … they will remind me that we all ‘change’ our tone and personality dependent on who we are talking to.
And that’s true … to an extent.
But this isn’t a tonal change, this is character.
I read that and it’s a brand I don’t recognise …
Feels more like they should be called Beigeit rather than Reddit.
The ability to adapt your voice to different audiences shouldn’t mean changing who you are.
People who play golf have a dramatically different view to sport than those who play football … but Nike still do it in a way where you know and feel it’s them. Just like CTO’s in major corporations has different requirements to those who want a laptop for home … but you never feel Apple changes who they are to communicate with them.
Brands who fundamentally change their personality in a bid to engage different audiences literally don’t know who they are. Worse, their customers may start to question that too.
Reddit are amazing.
Their audience is diverse, engaged and productive.
And while I appreciate some in business may not understand that, if you have to alter who you are, do you want them anyway?
Years ago I was doing work for Triple J … a government funded, youth radio station in Australia.
Unlike other ‘government funded’ media, Triple J was someone with real credibility, driven by championing and breaking new artists, discussing topics commercial radio wouldn’t touch with a barge pole and absolutely no advertising.
So when they came to us asking for help, we knew straight away that whatever we did had to ensure their current audience didn’t feel Triple J was selling out by advertising for more listeners.
While you may think this meant we went niche, we did the opposite.
Built off an idea we called, ‘enemy of the average’ … we went into mainstream media with messages that challenged audiences about the mediocrity they were engaging with.
Radio.
Newspapers.
Cinema.
Magazines.
Nightclubs.
Television.
Wherever mainstream audiences were, we were there too.
And while many hated our work [it was even discussed in Australian Parliament] it not only attracted the largest audience increase in Triple J’s history, it reinvigorated their existing audience because they saw the brand they love stay true to who they are, despite wanting what they didn’t have.
I get we’re in different times.
I appreciate the idea of any risk is unpalatable for so many.
But nothing is as dangerous as changing who you are to attract people who aren’t your audience.
The brand voice is more than how you talk. Or look. It’s how you look at the world … and if you’re consistent with that, then you can express yourself in a million different ways and always be yourself.
But too many brands, despite what they say, don’t want to be distinct.
They see it as having the potential to alienate an audience.
To which I say this …
While you may think being something to anyone means you can engage more people, the fact is, the most power to build the value of your brand is when you are everything to someone.